Loading...
Loading...
A small maker-led trend is emerging around DIY electrolysis devices, as hobbyists apply electronics know-how to a personal-care procedure usually performed by licensed professionals. One widely shared build log details constructing a galvanic (DC) electrolysis machine aimed at “permanent” hair removal—highlighting electrolysis as the only FDA-recognized permanent method compared with laser’s “permanent reduction.” The author surveys professional modalities (galvanic, thermolysis/RF, and blend) and opts for galvanic for simpler circuitry and perceived lower risk than RF heating. The project leans on textbook guidance using “lye units” (current over time) to estimate treatment dosing while prototyping needle and electrode hardware.
A Hacker News thread highlights a DIY project where the author built a home hair electrolysis device and shared the build (scd31.com). Commenters praised the detailed write-up, asked about hardware cost, pain, safety, and efficacy, and debated risks of home experimentation. Some suggested platforms for selling such gadgets (Tindie) and warned about eye and skin hazards with alternative hair-removal methods like IPL. The post attracted interest from people seeking affordable alternatives to clinical procedures and one user asked to collaborate on their own build. The discussion underscores both maker ingenuity and safety/regulatory concerns around creating home medical or cosmetic devices.
An individual hobbyist describes building a DIY hair electrolysis device intended to permanently remove body hair using electricity. The article contrasts temporary methods (shaving, waxing, epilation) with laser hair removal, which it characterizes as “permanent reduction,” and notes that electrolysis is the only method the FDA considers permanent. The author outlines three approaches used in professional electrolysis—galvanic (DC current generating lye in the follicle), thermolysis (RF heating), and blend (DC + RF)—and chooses galvanic for simplicity and lower perceived risk versus RF. They explain that lye production depends on current over time, using “lye units” where 1 mA for 1 s equals 10 LU, and cite a 2001 textbook table recommending 10–60 LU depending on hair type before beginning a prototype build.
An independent maker describes building a DIY galvanic hair electrolysis device to achieve “permanent” hair removal, noting electrolysis is the only method the FDA considers permanent. The article contrasts temporary methods (shaving, waxing, epilation) and laser hair removal, which it characterizes as permanent reduction rather than full removal. It outlines three professional approaches—galvanic, thermolysis (RF heating), and blend—and explains why the author chose galvanic: simpler design and fewer RF-related risks such as burns or scarring. The piece explains galvanic electrolysis as generating lye (sodium hydroxide) in the follicle by passing DC current between a needle electrode and a body electrode. It cites a 2001 textbook defining “lye units” (1 mA for 1 s = 10 LU) and provides LU ranges by hair type before describing an initial prototype and sourcing needles from a friend.
An independent hobbyist describes building a DIY galvanic hair electrolysis device to achieve “permanent” hair removal, noting electrolysis is the only FDA-recognized permanent method versus laser’s “permanent reduction.” The article outlines three approaches—galvanic (DC current generating lye in the follicle), thermolysis (RF heating), and blend (DC+RF)—and explains why the author chose galvanic as simpler and less prone to RF-related burns or scarring. The author emphasizes they are not medically qualified. For galvanic electrolysis, lye production is described as proportional to current over time, using “lye units” (LU), where 1 mA for 1 second equals 10 LU. A 2001 textbook table is cited recommending roughly 10–60 LU depending on hair depth and type. The piece ends as the first prototype begins, including sourcing needles from a friend.